I think you should ask the author of the license and perhaps ask for By Attribution and ShareAlike. Many educators hav seen good, and expensive packages and they would therefore feel used if a commercial interest appropriated stuff provided for nothing. Under ShareAlike, once someone bought the package, they would also be buying at cost reproduction rights, because the commercial interest would hav to indicate their source, somewhere.
It actually puts quite a reservation in the commercial interest. If the materials are really good, then they'll wonder if promotional efforts will be contagious and by that limit how long the materials are commercially viable.
The makers of Berkeley Standard Distribution (BSD) did not think that way (commercial use allowed), so now, much of their code is incorporated into Macs, so that Macs run on a popular cousin of UNIX (TM). A lot of programmers were probably thinking that donations would go to their school, and even if not, well, it is internet infrastructure to be proud of.
"Stephanie Clarkson" thespian@sleepingcat.com wrote in message news:49A394FE.1060503@sleepingcat.com...
I have been looking over a number of items having to do with educational methods. There are a few items that I think would benefit from illustrations of the methodologies, and I've found some examples, labelled with 'materials may be reproduced for educational purposes.' They are the sort of thing where in the course of a 10 page lesson plan, there's one page for photocopying for distribution, where they have relinquished some rights (but nothing clear like a CC license).
Does an encylopedia count as an educational purpose (or, I should say, for a declaration like that, does Wikipedia count in the eyes of the law as educational)?
S.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l